Wes Felter
Is this you? Claim Profile »
3 weeks ago
in Why Libertarians Should Oppose “Shrinkwrap” Contracts on The Technology Liberation Front
So shinkwrap contracts are bad, but clickwrap contracts (virtually the same thing) are good? It's good that commerce is moving online, because then the only way to avoid these one-sided contracts is to not use the Internet?
1 reply
4 weeks ago
in http://www.scripting.com/stories/2008/10/25/windowsOnAmazonDay3.html on Scripting News
4. Instances don't relaunch automatically (I don't understand why), so you're supposed to run two instances and have them check each other.
6. I think there are people who are using EC2 because it's cooler than a VPS, even if it isn't better for their needs.
6. I think there are people who are using EC2 because it's cooler than a VPS, even if it isn't better for their needs.
1 reply
dave
Thanks Wes -- that's exactly the kind of advice I need.
That's $93 a month just to run a script that keeps another instance running.
Hmmm.
That's $93 a month just to run a script that keeps another instance running.
Hmmm.
2 months ago
in Cloud Computing and the Constitution on The Wisdom of Clouds
What about companies incorporated in the USA with facilities elsewhere? (e.g. Rackspace) Is it enough for the data to be physically located outside the US?
1 reply
jamesurquhart
Excellent question. I'm just getting to know this issue and the associated laws. I'd welcome comments from anyone with applicable expertise, but I plan on hunting down an answer either way.
2 months ago
in Update: The Cloud Computing Bill of Rights on The Wisdom of Clouds
I don't think encryption can solve the problem. If you want to manipulate data in the cloud, you'd have to decrypt it in the cloud and then you're back to trusting the provider. The window of exposure may be smaller, though.
Also, many SaaS features (especially social ones) are based on the provider indexing and analyzing data, which doesn't work if the data is encrypted.
Also, many SaaS features (especially social ones) are based on the provider indexing and analyzing data, which doesn't work if the data is encrypted.
1 reply
BenjaminEllis
I'd second Wes. Encryption helps with confidentiality during transport (and potentially storage), but that doesn't address the privacy issue, since that is more around how data is handled when it is processed. Additionally, encryption adds a very big processing overhead, or a cost overhead if performed in hardware. Privacy is usually solved with policy, ahead of technology.
2 months ago
in Why Every Linux Application Known To Man Will Be SaaS Soon on The Wisdom of Clouds
Of course, single-tenant SaaS on EC2 probably has a minimum cost of ~$75/app/customer/month, which limits the addressable market. Although maybe customers would decide to run internal business apps only during business hours if it saves them money.
Food for thought: Is a one cent per hour virtual machine feasible?
Food for thought: Is a one cent per hour virtual machine feasible?
1 reply
jamesurquhart
Ah, but that $75 includes infrastructure, which would cost for a single tenant app whether directly owned or via hosting providers. When looking at this as a service alone, single tenant may be untenable (without automation to save $$ where possible). However, if comparing to the cost of hosting the same application on the same quality and quantity of resources yourself (or via dedicated hosting), it doesn't look quite so bad.
Good point, though. Most people will quickly look at an app hosted in the cloud as a service, not necessarily an instance of a license.
James
Good point, though. Most people will quickly look at an app hosted in the cloud as a service, not necessarily an instance of a license.
James
6 months ago
in Comcast's 250GB limit? (Scripting News) on Scripting News
It is certainly convenient that the long-distance phone network only bills the calling party, but there is a hidden cost in the system: a complex inter-provider settlement system. That system isn't free. Backbone Internet traffic doesn't have a settlement system, making the Internet cheaper overall.
1 reply
mjesales
I guess since I pay for the outgoing bandwidth of my webserver (and the incoming on some hosts) - then the customer shouldn't be charged extra for using more. Its readily available, and if it isn't then a ISP needs to address that situation.
The clickwrap case sounds exactly the same to me as a standard form contract. The only difference is that one is online and one is on paper. In either case, my actual agreement to the terms is required - and it is, of course, perfectly within the seller's right to refuse to give me its files or products unless I agree to provisions that it sets forth.